Ad Hominem

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person" or "argument against the person") is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of a person advocating the premise[1].

I have two reasons for writing this post today. The first deals with how we deal with defending what we believe.

I'd first like to state though that I think it is important to know what you believe and be ready to defend your beliefs, and I think Peter lays this out well (1 Peter 3:15). Defending is passive though, and it's active brother is proselytizing. Proselytizing for Christians is spreading the Gospel, and that is laid out in Mark (Mark 16:15). So in no way do I condemn anyone for telling what they believe, in fact I commend those who stand up and say what it is that they believe; I see it as a Biblical imperative.

Also, I don't disparage anyone for having an opinion that differs from mine. I expect there to be differences in interpretation and I do not see that as a sign of schism in the church. Furthermore, I do not believe that we as a group as called to complete doctrinal unity; to say such strikes of gnosticism to me. I've never held to the thought that to be saved, you have to have your doctrine just right and have a perfect understanding of the Bible. The problem with that belief is who is right? Additionally, every group that has ever grasped "all of the truth" has set it in stone and they have put themselves in a position where it's difficult if not impossible to move out into a deeper understanding. I cannot honestly subscribe to anyone person or group holding all of the truth, especially myself; this strikes me as cult-like.

With a progressive revelation, we are ever learning and being shown new things, whether they come from God directly or through another saint that God uses for this purpose (Prov 27:17). We need to be able to present new ideas and discuss them, seeking out the truth in a spirit of love (1 Thess 5:21). We are called to a unity of the Spirit, which is one of the products of God's intercession.

What is not acceptable is attacking someones character because they don't see eye to eye with you. A person's character is not representative of whether or not they are correct in a particular case. I can honestly say that I can heartily disagree with someone and still consider them my brother.

I have a good friend whom I disagree with on just about every doctrine. There's another friend of mine who over the years has come to an understanding that closely parallels my own. Is the second friend a genius and the first an idiot? Is the first person blind or perhaps am I? Which one of them is more righteous then the other? I certainly am not the one to judge righteousness, and furthermore, both of these friends spend considerable time in the scriptures studying. Neither of them has any mental deficiency nor are they not ardent in their research. They are merely at different levels of understanding, and I have to assume that they are currently right where God wants them to be. To believe otherwise is a great denial on my part, and I would need my faith strengthened.

Furthermore, finding out that a person possesses terrible character quality does not invalidate the truth that he has said. An extreme example of this can sadly be found in our group as well. Bro. Tom Jolly committed some heinous acts and was eventually arrested for them. The fact remains that he said things that were good and true, and God showed him these truths. I do not deny Tom Jolly's ministry or what positive impact he had on our group; at the same time I don't condone anything despicable that he did. It's my understanding that God loves us and uses us despite how we act sometimes. Grace is operative when we don't deserve it, and especially operative when we really don't deserve it. It would be unwise of us to throw away everything that this man said just because of his later actions.

The second reason that I wrote this post is to apply it to myself. I do not want to convey myself as attacking the character of any other person, especially Bro. Paul Dyal. The printed word sometimes is not an adequate method of conveying feelings, so I want to take a little time to expound on this so that I make myself very clear.

I do not hold a grudge against Bro. Dyal. I sincerely hope that I am making myself clear with that statement; it's as clear and concise as I can make it. I do not think that he is addled of wits or that he has ulterior motives. On the contrary, if I were to judge his actions, I would say that they are those of a man who is passionate about defending God's people from harm. I hold Bro. Dyal in high regard for this as not everyone would do this. I recognize the fervor he displays and admire him for it. He is a good man, a man to be trusted, and man whom I consider a brother in Christ. I merely disagree with him on some points.

I am not trying to discredit the man, just disagree with him. I'm not trying to attack him, just present my viewpoint using a similar outlet. I also want to state definitively right here right now that I might be wrong. I don't think I am, but I'm certainly not infallible. The flip side of this is that Bro. Dyal might be wrong as well, and I happen to think he is in his regimented stance on the standards of holiness.

I want to be able to disagree with someone without creating a personal issue for myself and additionally without causing injury to someone I respect. As a matter of fact, I enjoy listening to Bro. Dyal talk a lot. I have found that I learn much more from someone who has a different viewpoint than I do if I'm able to have an open mind. The fact that just about everyone in the ministry sees things a little differently than I do grants me tons of opportunities to learn.

Seeing that I do not intend to cause any hurt to anyone I disagree with, I apologize if I do. Let me know personally and I will apologize specifically addressing any indiscretion. I don't think it's wrong for me to expect the same courtesy reciprocated though. I pray that because I disagree with anyone that they wouldn't take it upon themselves to lash out at me in an inappropriate way, to cause me hurt, or to defame my character. And not just me, anyone who has an opposing viewpoint. Disagree, but do so in with a spirit of meekness and of love.

There's only one thing left to address, and that is a specific defamation of the character of Bro. Steve Farmer. I've only known this man personally for about a year. I attended a service at his church while visiting some of my friends, and I was introduced to him then. I got to know him better later at a meeting this summer and I will say this of him. He strikes me as an excellent listener and a patient man. I also consider him a brother, but more importantly to me I consider him my friend. I look forward to getting to know him better as time goes on.

Over the last six months though, I've heard every type of attack on Bro. Farmer and his character. What the man has said has been distorted and taken out of context again and again. His motives have been brought into question and he has also been used as a tool to stir up unrest between churches in our group. Rumors have been passed on as fact, some of which are categorically wrong. Also his name has been attached to problems in churches throughout our group that have nothing to do with anything he has either said or done. Disagree with him, in fact, do so boisterously, especially if you believe that he is wrong. However if you attack him and his character, you are wrong, and you need to repent to him. Oh, and by the way if you intend on disagreeing with him, it helps to know what he's really said, so take the time to dig and find out instead of listening to second-hand rumor.

At a camp meeting I attended as a teenager, I was listening to an very elderly minister that I didn't know speaking on pre-marital sex where he made a point that was completely wrong. He said that pre-marital sex was permissible if you intended to get married. I believe that what he was really trying to say was if you've had pre-marital sex, you should get married to that person and seek forgiveness and his age (well over ninety) was the origin of his confusion. Sin is never permissible, just forgivable, we all know that. The fact remains that what was meant to be a twenty minute talk ended up being a two hour back and forth where this elderly gentleman was stretched out beyond his capacity, and was being lambasted by the ministry and reviled by the congregation. Some attacked him, and I heard people referring to him as the pre-marital sex preacher for the rest of the meeting. Sure he was wrong, but we didn't have to run him down as we did. Attacking him in this manner was immature at best, but it is human nature, part of the human experience, and sadly to be expected. We certainly did not show a spirit of love at that meeting.

We are brothers and sisters in Christ and to not expect some friction between siblings is naive. I do expect that through the working of the Spirit, we can find the truth and progress into more of the blessings God has in store for us.

Reference:

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem